jeffrey-wimberly wrote: cacole wrote: We've been using candles and kerosene lanterns for years and years, and don't need no 'lectric light!"We've come a long way since the nay-sayers of 1879 trying to write off the improved incandescent light bulb. That's right, the incandescent light bulb was already out there. Edison took what was already there and improved it. It was through direct marketing that Edison made his bulb popular.DC for layout power has been king for many, many years. But, DCC isn't the first control system to have come out for model railroads. Anybody remember 'Astrac'? The Astrac system sent radio signals through the rails to special recievers in the locomotives which could each be controlled independantly of each other, even in the same block. Sound familiar? The problem was that each reciever had to be specially tuned (which was a PITA!). The new system (DCC) took what was already there and improved it and made it much simpler to use.
cacole wrote: We've been using candles and kerosene lanterns for years and years, and don't need no 'lectric light!"
We've been using candles and kerosene lanterns for years and years, and don't need no 'lectric light!"
DC for layout power has been king for many, many years. But, DCC isn't the first control system to have come out for model railroads. Anybody remember 'Astrac'? The Astrac system sent radio signals through the rails to special recievers in the locomotives which could each be controlled independantly of each other, even in the same block. Sound familiar? The problem was that each reciever had to be specially tuned (which was a PITA!). The new system (DCC) took what was already there and improved it and made it much simpler to use.
They are working on light emitting chemicals that you paint onto a wall and retire the old light bulb as we knew em at some point in the future.
At first I did not want to participate in this thread because it seemed to be such a silly declaration to make and nothing but trouble.
El-Capitan states: And as far as the "toggle flipping" term that has been thrown around here, hasn't toggle flipping been replaced with "button pushing" with DCC?
Yes, but actually there are Far fewer buttons to push.
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
tangerine-jack wrote: dave 1194 wrote:" I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable. " okay... following that logic, why do you have (or use at a library or work, or whatever) a computer and obtain access to the internet? chances are that if you grew up without DCC you grew up without the internet, so why such a luddite when it comes to enhancing your model railroad experience? worrying about throwing switches and all that nonsense for electrical "blocks" simply detracts from the fine art of yard switching. how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block?? just my two cents, and i hope this doesnt seem like a nastygram... Nasty, no, not at all! A very valid point. I am forced at work etc. to use a computer, I don't like them, and they fail more often than they work. They certainly are not my preferred method of getting things done, but I have no choice if I want to interact with the modern world and conduct business. My model railroad is not constrained by the modern world, I choose if I want to find a bad wire by looking, or spend hours diagnosing a DCC gremlin (is it the encoder, decoder, uploader, downloader, programming, PC, PCC, LSD, NBA or just a bad wire?). I don't have to be forced in my hobby to do anything I don't want to. I take comfort in knowing, I mean positively knowing, that the #4 red wire to track 7 is soldered properly to the rail and when I throw the selector switch electricity will pass through to the loco. Sure, it can be a pain to route select with DC, but I do feel more connected to my layout that way and I can pretend to be an overpaid corporate sell out union dispatcher making 200K a year by throwing switches (no offence to real railroad workers, it's just my fantasy, that's all).I am certainly not saying DCC is crap, I use it regularly and enjoy its benefits, but I don't feel comfortable with the technology. Last year a photo journalist with the Chrysler museum came by to do a photo shoot, I am now forever in print trying to get my DCC loco to communicate with transmitter. Had I used DC, the train would have been running for the photo shoot. DCC makes wiring the layout very simple (a few feed blocks and some reversing loop tricks is all it takes), I'm not as sure about operations as a whole. What's the difference between throwing a switch on the DC panel as opposed to pushing buttons on the DCC control pad? I have to work either way, one to shunt electricity, the other to program a gizmo to communicate with a loco. I just feel more comfortable shunting electricity. No harm, no foul. Some like technology, some like the old skool way. If you enjoy the hobby, then who really cares?"how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block??"Easy, it's called planning your operating session. It's like playing a game to me, I enjoy it a lot. Besides, I worry about my DCC engines stopping for no apparent reason, so what's the difference?
dave 1194 wrote:" I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable. " okay... following that logic, why do you have (or use at a library or work, or whatever) a computer and obtain access to the internet? chances are that if you grew up without DCC you grew up without the internet, so why such a luddite when it comes to enhancing your model railroad experience? worrying about throwing switches and all that nonsense for electrical "blocks" simply detracts from the fine art of yard switching. how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block?? just my two cents, and i hope this doesnt seem like a nastygram...
" I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable. "
okay... following that logic, why do you have (or use at a library or work, or whatever) a computer and obtain access to the internet? chances are that if you grew up without DCC you grew up without the internet, so why such a luddite when it comes to enhancing your model railroad experience? worrying about throwing switches and all that nonsense for electrical "blocks" simply detracts from the fine art of yard switching. how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block?? just my two cents, and i hope this doesnt seem like a nastygram...
Nasty, no, not at all! A very valid point. I am forced at work etc. to use a computer, I don't like them, and they fail more often than they work. They certainly are not my preferred method of getting things done, but I have no choice if I want to interact with the modern world and conduct business.
My model railroad is not constrained by the modern world, I choose if I want to find a bad wire by looking, or spend hours diagnosing a DCC gremlin (is it the encoder, decoder, uploader, downloader, programming, PC, PCC, LSD, NBA or just a bad wire?). I don't have to be forced in my hobby to do anything I don't want to.
I take comfort in knowing, I mean positively knowing, that the #4 red wire to track 7 is soldered properly to the rail and when I throw the selector switch electricity will pass through to the loco. Sure, it can be a pain to route select with DC, but I do feel more connected to my layout that way and I can pretend to be an overpaid corporate sell out union dispatcher making 200K a year by throwing switches (no offence to real railroad workers, it's just my fantasy, that's all).
I am certainly not saying DCC is crap, I use it regularly and enjoy its benefits, but I don't feel comfortable with the technology. Last year a photo journalist with the Chrysler museum came by to do a photo shoot, I am now forever in print trying to get my DCC loco to communicate with transmitter. Had I used DC, the train would have been running for the photo shoot.
DCC makes wiring the layout very simple (a few feed blocks and some reversing loop tricks is all it takes), I'm not as sure about operations as a whole. What's the difference between throwing a switch on the DC panel as opposed to pushing buttons on the DCC control pad? I have to work either way, one to shunt electricity, the other to program a gizmo to communicate with a loco. I just feel more comfortable shunting electricity.
No harm, no foul. Some like technology, some like the old skool way. If you enjoy the hobby, then who really cares?
"how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block??"
Easy, it's called planning your operating session. It's like playing a game to me, I enjoy it a lot. Besides, I worry about my DCC engines stopping for no apparent reason, so what's the difference?
well said. if whatever you do provides a respite from the stress and strains of today's world, go ahead and do it! i'd sure have choice words for anyone that told me how to spend my free time, let alone micro-manage it...
djt out
I'm going to ad something from the perspective from a relatively new guy in the hobby(soon a year) and someone who can't even find the battery in his car(almost, I do now). So with this in mind bear with me!!
When I came back into the hobby after a 20 year hiatus I started with DCC straight away. I didn't find it that more expensive even though each new loco of course comes with a higher price tag. But it's so simple to use. When I built my first layout last summer I didn't do any wiring at all. I just plugged it in and off I went on a magical journey with my trains and my kids. My son is three years old and he is very excited about running his own engine. He presses the sound buttons(to much) and is thriving with the easy options that DCC have given us. When I start working on my second layout shortly I will do so with utmost confidence that my low, very low technical skill won't stop me from running several engines along my kids and just plain having fun. And for ME, I want to emphasize that this is ME and my kids this wouldn't been possible with DC because I just wouldn't have the skill to pull it off.
Anyways, in such a small hobby we should care for each other and respect each others decisions. What works for me might be hell for someone else. Who am I to tell someone what to like.
Best regards, Magnus
One comment: What if there was a second train coming at that lone operater out onthe main? Now someone has to take a siding to let the other guy past. With DCC, someone (maybe a tower operator or a CTC dispatcher) lines the turnouts and the two engineers simply run their trains. With DC, someone has to do a bunch of toggle flipping to direct power, which is NOT in the least bit prototypical (unless this is a model of an electrified railroad, in which case it's somewhat prototypical to direct power to layotu sections). That so-called 'zombie' was being a locomotive ENGINEER. Not a towerman, not a dispatcher, not a power director.Withotu some rather complex hardware, you can't just 'run your train' with DC, you or someone has to worry about setting the block power to your cab as you run along. There is no such thing in DCC. Internally DCC might be rather complex, but liek many other appliances we use, it can be treated as a black box. You do NOT need to understand what's happening indise the box to be able to effectively use it. Whereas with a DC cab control setup, you always have to be aware of how it works, even if you are out there all alone running a train. Drive into a block where you forgot to set the power and your train suddenly stops.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE wrote:Randy,You have no idea how a real CTC board works..DC CTC comes the closest.
I don't either, but I do see real trains running together on the same track. DCC is the closest thing we have now to reality. Its just obvious.
Driline wrote: BRAKIE wrote:Randy,You have no idea how a real CTC board works..DC CTC comes the closest.I don't either, but I do see real trains running together on the same track. DCC is the closest thing we have now to reality. Its just obvious.
Theres all kinds of toggle switches on a reall CTC board
As far as 2 trains running on 1 track we do that twice aweek at the club on our point to point layout.
rrinker wrote:One comment: What if there was a second train coming at that lone operater out onthe main? Now someone has to take a siding to let the other guy past. With DCC, someone (maybe a tower operator or a CTC dispatcher) lines the turnouts and the two engineers simply run their trains. With DC, someone has to do a bunch of toggle flipping to direct power, which is NOT in the least bit prototypical (unless this is a model of an electrified railroad, in which case it's somewhat prototypical to direct power to layotu sections). That so-called 'zombie' was being a locomotive ENGINEER. Not a towerman, not a dispatcher, not a power director.Withotu some rather complex hardware, you can't just 'run your train' with DC, you or someone has to worry about setting the block power to your cab as you run along. There is no such thing in DCC. Internally DCC might be rather complex, but liek many other appliances we use, it can be treated as a black box. You do NOT need to understand what's happening indise the box to be able to effectively use it. Whereas with a DC cab control setup, you always have to be aware of how it works, even if you are out there all alone running a train. Drive into a block where you forgot to set the power and your train suddenly stops. --Randy
Randy nailed it exactly. After running with cab control on some large club layouts, I quickly decided command control was the only way to fly on a large layout. Setting up a basic DCC system is no more complex than your average HD TV and DVD player. With most new locos having a decoder socket and being plug and play, most of the complexities are removed.
Like going from VHS tape to DVD, going from DC to DCC is similar in that you have to learn some new terminology and a few new skills. But two are about similar in the level of conceptual switch. Once you make the switch, however, few ever want to go back. DCC so simplifies things overall that most later wonder why they waited so long.
Joe Fugate Modeling the 1980s SP Siskiyou Line in southern Oregon
I think I saw this one before.
I'm going ta bed. G'nite.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Not being able to see the engine in your staging yard is more a function of bad layout design than your control system.
I generally run my layout by myself, so having all the "buttons" at my fingertips (and not someone else's) does a pretty good job of minimizing the opportunities for "cornfield meets." I've also found that having some scenery in place helps keep the trains from falling more than a half inch or so if you do slip up...
Look... I fought going with DCC for years. The club I belong to has a Digitrax set up that might as well have been developed by NASA. I've been a member for almost 10 years, and I still don't know how to call up a locomotive on that thing. Every throttle they make is different from the other, and I find the number of control modules, boosters or whatever they call them to be a bit mind boggling. I also ran the Lenz system on the N scale layout there, and found its manual just as confusing, especially since it was badly translated from German. "Push now the button left side of ... blah blah blah." While setting up and getting started were a mystery to me, running with DCC was a joy. When MRC Prodigy Advance was introduced, I jumped in with both feet. It was cheap, easy to set up and understand, and was installed within 5 minutes of signing the UPS ticket.
I think what we'll be seeing in coming years will be ever smaller yet more powerful decoders, more equipment that has factory installed chips, chips showing up in things like passenger cars, cabooses, cars with FREDs, and any of a number of trackside accessories that can be programmed to do something. The more that become available, the lower the price will go.
DC will never die completely, it's way too versatile, inexpensive, and easy to rig up for a simple starter layout. But that will be because DCC chips will be more transparent running on DC, not because DC is better.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
jfugate wrote: rrinker wrote: One comment: What if there was a second train coming at that lone operater out onthe main? Now someone has to take a siding to let the other guy past. With DCC, someone (maybe a tower operator or a CTC dispatcher) lines the turnouts and the two engineers simply run their trains. With DC, someone has to do a bunch of toggle flipping to direct power, which is NOT in the least bit prototypical (unless this is a model of an electrified railroad, in which case it's somewhat prototypical to direct power to layotu sections). That so-called 'zombie' was being a locomotive ENGINEER. Not a towerman, not a dispatcher, not a power director.Withotu some rather complex hardware, you can't just 'run your train' with DC, you or someone has to worry about setting the block power to your cab as you run along. There is no such thing in DCC. Internally DCC might be rather complex, but liek many other appliances we use, it can be treated as a black box. You do NOT need to understand what's happening indise the box to be able to effectively use it. Whereas with a DC cab control setup, you always have to be aware of how it works, even if you are out there all alone running a train. Drive into a block where you forgot to set the power and your train suddenly stops. --RandyRandy nailed it exactly. After running with cab control on some large club layouts, I quickly decided command control was the only way to fly on a large layout. Setting up a basic DCC system is no more complex than your average HD TV and DVD player. With most new locos having a decoder socket and being plug and play, most of the complexities are removed.Like going from VHS tape to DVD, going from DC to DCC is similar in that you have to learn some new terminology and a few new skills. But two are about similar in the level of conceptual switch. Once you make the switch, however, few ever want to go back. DCC so simplifies things overall that most later wonder why they waited so long.
rrinker wrote: One comment: What if there was a second train coming at that lone operater out onthe main? Now someone has to take a siding to let the other guy past. With DCC, someone (maybe a tower operator or a CTC dispatcher) lines the turnouts and the two engineers simply run their trains. With DC, someone has to do a bunch of toggle flipping to direct power, which is NOT in the least bit prototypical (unless this is a model of an electrified railroad, in which case it's somewhat prototypical to direct power to layotu sections). That so-called 'zombie' was being a locomotive ENGINEER. Not a towerman, not a dispatcher, not a power director.Withotu some rather complex hardware, you can't just 'run your train' with DC, you or someone has to worry about setting the block power to your cab as you run along. There is no such thing in DCC. Internally DCC might be rather complex, but liek many other appliances we use, it can be treated as a black box. You do NOT need to understand what's happening indise the box to be able to effectively use it. Whereas with a DC cab control setup, you always have to be aware of how it works, even if you are out there all alone running a train. Drive into a block where you forgot to set the power and your train suddenly stops. --Randy
Joe,DCC will never work in our club..We have operation melt downs as it is when one yard gets backed up.We have a bottle neck at West Dayton where the Newark Sub joins the main.
DCC can't do the impossible and its not the cure all..In the club's position it won't even be a aspirin to ease the DS's headache.
Oh indeed I do know how a real CTC board works, both the classic US&S types and the modern computer versions. DC power routing is NOTHING like lining routes with CTC, although I suppose you could configure the hardware so that it sets the proper cab to the block as you line the routes. But the hardware to accomplish this would make DCC look like a simple battery and light bulb circuit in comparison. I recommend you take a look at JMRI and Railroad and Company and see what can be done in DCC. No where on a real railroad does the DS connect the blue cab to block 5 and the red cab to block 6. With DCC, not having to worry abotu cab/block assignmetns means you actually CAN make realistic interlockings because like the real railroad all you need to worry about is the detection and signals.
With software like JMRI or RR&Co, you can build either a classic type machine or duplicate the modern computer screen types. That really has nothign to do with DC vs DCC, but if you then run DC power, SOMEONE is goign to have the task of assigning cabs to blocks so the trains can make the meets and passes lined by the dispatcher.
Looking ahead of your train and moving a multi-position rotary switch to connect your cab to the next block isn't realistic railroading.
Randy,We use a real US&S board..I am not to sure what railroad but,believe it to be a either old NYC or Erie board.
It looks like this but,longer:
http://www.cliftonforgediv.com/signals.htm
All our road engineers need to do is run their train and obey the block signals.
So Brakie, what you're saying is along the same lines as what I said... It doesn't matter what control system you're using if your layout is poorly designed.
I dare say that DCC does offer a bit more flexibility, though. I had rigged my layout for simple DC with a couple of blocks to hold trains before I bought my MRC Prodigy Advance. It was a pain, because in some instances I would have to back a train up, or use the 0-5-0 to fix a bottleneck. With the DCC, and without changing the track plan at all, I can re-route trains anywhere I want to avoid problems.
May I ask a few Qs?
How easy is it to install decoders in things? What tools do you need?
If I am to get DCC, all I want it for is to have my Blue Box athearn run side by side with my new Kato unit. I dont need any of this or that, just to be able to run a 4 unit consist with an Atlas,P2k,Athearn, and a Kato and not worry about problems with speed. Can anyone here give me a link to a starter kit with just the necessities?
Alec
BRAKIE wrote: Randy,We use a real US&S board..I am not to sure what railroad but,believe it to be a either old NYC or Erie board.It looks like this but,longer:http://www.cliftonforgediv.com/signals.htmAll our road engineers need to do is run their train and obey the block signals.
So you've attached a lot of extra circuitry to route the cabs according to the cleared routes? Or what? Do you use route cab control? I have a lot of the odl issues of MR where Linn Westcott explained various cab control systems and presented circuits for them - and wow was that one complex. Easy for the engineer to run a train, sure - but there's a huge penalty in complexity. Yes it can be argued that the microcontroller inside a DCC command station is far more complex than any number of miles of wire and relays and switches, but like I said, you cna effectively treat the DCC system as a black box, you do NOT need to know the detaisl of how it works inside to connect it up and use it. But you can't just go out and buy a box and connect an input and and output and make a route cab control system.
wctransfer wrote: May I ask a few Qs?How easy is it to install decoders in things? What tools do you need?If I am to get DCC, all I want it for is to have my Blue Box athearn run side by side with my new Kato unit. I dont need any of this or that, just to be able to run a 4 unit consist with an Atlas,P2k,Athearn, and a Kato and not worry about problems with speed. Can anyone here give me a link to a starter kit with just the necessities?Alec
Alec,
This may be helpful to you. Click or type in this link:
http://litchfieldstation.com/lobby/u_what.htm
Hi all,
Seems like we have a few DCC brains here so I have a few questions from a person sitting on the fence, contemplating the jump from DC to DCC.
Question 1: I see an article in May 07 MRR about modifying points for DCC, do I need to do this, some of you have described the conversion as just plugging in the new DCC unit? I have used insulfrog points by peco. I think I have about 60 points, I really don't want to be pulling these all up to modify each one!
Question 2: The reversing loop, I have a loop but it goes from one main line to another but it does reverse the direction, do I need a reversing loop module still?!
Question 3: lighting, I would need to rewire all the lights in the locomotives to the Decoder on my older locos?! Do I need different bulbs because of this?!
Question 4: On some of the really old locomotives some tend to use the direct contact of the wheels to one side of the motor as part of the chassis, how do you wire a decoder in that situation?
Question 5: Turntables, the voltage changes direction in DC depending on the side that comes into contact with the rail, how do you overcome that problem?!
I finished the wiring not too long ago and it is working fine, I just don't want to go backwards and have to pull up points to cut power connectors, and rewire too many areas and find some locos impossible to run in DCC. I read an article recently that suggested leaving the control panel in, as it allowed any short circuits to be found more easily by isolating sections but otherwise just turn all the switches on and have fun!
Hope there weren't too many questions, these are a few that are preventing me making leap, I program Programmable Logic Controllers to Operate Coal Mines for my work, the programming side really doesn't phase me at all!
Regards,
Nigel
ngartshore350 wrote: Hi all,Seems like we have a few DCC brains here so I have a few questions from a person sitting on the fence, contemplating the jump from DC to DCC.Question 1: I see an article in May 07 MRR about modifying points for DCC, do I need to do this, some of you have described the conversion as just plugging in the new DCC unit? I have used insulfrog points by peco. I think I have about 60 points, I really don't want to be pulling these all up to modify each one!Question 2: The reversing loop, I have a loop but it goes from one main line to another but it does reverse the direction, do I need a reversing loop module still?!Question 3: lighting, I would need to rewire all the lights in the locomotives to the Decoder on my older locos?! Do I need different bulbs because of this?!Question 4: On some of the really old locomotives some tend to use the direct contact of the wheels to one side of the motor as part of the chassis, how do you wire a decoder in that situation?Question 5: Turntables, the voltage changes direction in DC depending on the side that comes into contact with the rail, how do you overcome that problem?!I finished the wiring not too long ago and it is working fine, I just don't want to go backwards and have to pull up points to cut power connectors, and rewire too many areas and find some locos impossible to run in DCC. I read an article recently that suggested leaving the control panel in, as it allowed any short circuits to be found more easily by isolating sections but otherwise just turn all the switches on and have fun!Hope there weren't too many questions, these are a few that are preventing me making leap, I program Programmable Logic Controllers to Operate Coal Mines for my work, the programming side really doesn't phase me at all!Regards,Nigel
It sounds to me that you have a good operating DC layout and are finding excuses not to go DCC. Its OK..........you don't have to. If you are comfortable and happy with your existing layout then don't. I'm sure you know the advantages of DCC and apparently they are not important to you. Again....no big deal. The DCC police arn't going to take you to jail
I'm not going to answer each of your questions as I'm sure someone else will with better instructions than me will do so.
Suffice to say all of your questions can be addressed with little to no modification to go DCC.
ngartshore350 wrote:Hi all,Seems like we have a few DCC brains here so I have a few questions from a person sitting on the fence, contemplating the jump from DC to DCC.Question 1: I see an article in May 07 MRR about modifying points for DCC, do I need to do this, some of you have described the conversion as just plugging in the new DCC unit? I have used insulfrog points by peco. I think I have about 60 points, I really don't want to be pulling these all up to modify each one!Question 2: The reversing loop, I have a loop but it goes from one main line to another but it does reverse the direction, do I need a reversing loop module still?!Question 3: lighting, I would need to rewire all the lights in the locomotives to the Decoder on my older locos?! Do I need different bulbs because of this?!Question 4: On some of the really old locomotives some tend to use the direct contact of the wheels to one side of the motor as part of the chassis, how do you wire a decoder in that situation?Question 5: Turntables, the voltage changes direction in DC depending on the side that comes into contact with the rail, how do you overcome that problem?!I finished the wiring not too long ago and it is working fine, I just don't want to go backwards and have to pull up points to cut power connectors, and rewire too many areas and find some locos impossible to run in DCC. I read an article recently that suggested leaving the control panel in, as it allowed any short circuits to be found more easily by isolating sections but otherwise just turn all the switches on and have fun!Hope there weren't too many questions, these are a few that are preventing me making leap, I program Programmable Logic Controllers to Operate Coal Mines for my work, the programming side really doesn't phase me at all!Regards,Nigel
Nigel,
check out www.wiringfordcc.com for in-depth answers.
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
Hi NeO6874 & Driline!
Thanks for the advice, no not looking for excuses just don't want to spend more time playing with wires to change to DCC. If it as easy as they say that is great with a little mods for the Turntable and loop!! Just being cautious, I have the plywood plains at the moment and the last thing I need is to re-wiring the layout! I'm sooooooooo tempted but still a little cautious.
Currently I'm adding signaling with detectors so there is a little wiring going on but I have almost completed the backdrops with the exception of clouds and I'd like to move on, but if DCC requires wiring mods it is much easier now before I start balasting track!
Nige.
PS: Like the Yoda Comment!
I thought about switching to DCC, but as soon as I saw sound locomotives in DC--I have no desire to switch to DCC. Maybe someday way down the road--like 20 years--I will switch to whatever is the new technology at that point.
wm3798 wrote: Not being able to see the engine in your staging yard is more a function of bad layout design than your control system.
So anybody with a hidden storage yard has a poorly designed layout? This is laughable.
Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics:
wm3798 wrote: So Brakie, what you're saying is along the same lines as what I said... It doesn't matter what control system you're using if your layout is poorly designed.Lee
Lee,It was DESIGN that way..Even real railroads have bottle neck spots where trains need to wait for a slot to open before they can proceed..This may be alien to many but,we wanted to emulate prototypical operations as realistically as possible.While running a local I have waited at West Dayton for several train to pass before I could reenter the main from West Dayton Industrial Park.That was about 20 minute (real time) wait..
So no,the layout is not poorly design as it does exactly what it was designed to do-emulate prototypical operation on a single track main line with sub division traffic joining the main.
rrinker wrote: BRAKIE wrote: Randy,We use a real US&S board..I am not to sure what railroad but,believe it to be a either old NYC or Erie board.It looks like this but,longer:http://www.cliftonforgediv.com/signals.htmAll our road engineers need to do is run their train and obey the block signals. So you've attached a lot of extra circuitry to route the cabs according to the cleared routes? Or what? Do you use route cab control? I have a lot of the odl issues of MR where Linn Westcott explained various cab control systems and presented circuits for them - and wow was that one complex. Easy for the engineer to run a train, sure - but there's a huge penalty in complexity. Yes it can be argued that the microcontroller inside a DCC command station is far more complex than any number of miles of wire and relays and switches, but like I said, you cna effectively treat the DCC system as a black box, you do NOT need to know the detaisl of how it works inside to connect it up and use it. But you can't just go out and buy a box and connect an input and and output and make a route cab control system. --Randy
Randy,The joy of running trains,making meets with 1 or more trains makes it worth while.
Let me repeat myself..In the club's position DCC won't even be a aspirin to ease the DS's headache when it comes to operation and I know 42 guys who will fully agree.
Brakie,
You're saying that DCC won't be the club's "aspirin" or won't make the operating situation any better? And there are 40 guys that agree.......
O.K, but will it not make overall operations easier? Add to that it's likely that some of your members have never tried the special lighting effects or sound through DCC. Is it possible that some of them may enjoy controlling their locos headlights, Mars/Gyra lights, and sounds?
Like the group I belonged to, they might have a change of heart once they try it. We went "Ga-Ga!" That's what happened at my club's 20 year old layout once the switch was made. No one wants to go back...including the members that were originally anti-dcc. Membership also increased, rather quickly.
Respectfully, to each his own and DC is fine, but it just makes me wonder though if your membership's resistence to the idea is more out of "don't shake the status quo" and "If it's not broken, don't try to fix it" type of mood.
Exactly what I've been thinking all along, Antonio. No, DCC will not fix an operational bottleneck caused by track arrangement and/or traffic flow in the operating scheme, but it surely makes operation easier. Brakie's club seems to have some sort of route cab control or other scheme that does not require the engineer to handle the block/cab assignments, which means under DCC they should see minimal if any change. The dispatcher(s) though, would see their role change to JUST lining routes on the CTC panel. There is apparantly a full signalling system involved, so granted a move to DCC would not be cheap. Since the engineers do not assign cabs to blocks I am assuming the signal system is highly integrated with the control system, thus this would not be a situation where the DC cabs could be disconnected and DCC connected in its place, leaving the signal system until later to upgrade, if required. Sounds like with Brakie's club it would have to be all or nothing.
Randy,It would be all or nothing with a possible wiring rebuild.While it sounds complex its not.Detection for the signals is done by locomotive and end car.The end car has its axle painted with resistance paint.Power routing is done by the DS through block toggle switches for track polarity.Left equals West bound while Right equals East bound.We have arrows above each block to show the DS which way the train is heading.If the arrow is white on the right its a Eastbound..White on the left a Westbound.
We use walk around control and the signals tells the engineer what to expect at the next signal.We have signals from clear to slow clear and Medium-Approach Slow-used for yard entrance.
Dispatching is not very complicated but,one needs trained under a experience DS.
We have 2 dispatchers.One for the main line and one for Newark Sub.